[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2022-05-12: Ghost posting is now globally disabled. 2022: Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/ck/ - Food & Cooking


View post   
View page     

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 68 KB, 770x513, Dog.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9376299 No.9376299 [Reply] [Original]

what's with the moralfaggotry of eating dogs?
i've tasted dogs once and it was pretty delicious,westernfags only get butthurt because they keep it at home
i'm pretty sure a mastiff confit would taste excellent

>> No.9376309

>eating the nigger animal

>> No.9376317

>>9376299
It's not eating dogs or cats for that matter is bad. I just hate how disgusting chinks will just find gross animals off the street and eat that. It's a hell of a lot different than farm raising animals. If they farm raised dogs and cats I'd eat them.

>> No.9376320

>>9376299
>He think there's no difference between eating animals specifically domesticated for meat and eating an animal that was domesticated for hunting and protection
Dogs were the first animal humans domesticated. They were domesticated during a time when humans had to hunt for food. The dog was specifically domesticated to help humans hunt and provide protection.
That is completely different than eating a cow or pig, animals that were domesticated later for the sole purpose of providing meat.

>> No.9376325

>>9376320
What were apes domesticated for?

>> No.9376343

>>9376320
in china they do breed dogs specifically for eating your point is irrelevant.

>> No.9376349

>>9376320
>hurr durr we made dogs docile and subservient to us that means we shouldn't eat them
weak excuse,this isnt hunter gatherer days when we need dogs to chase after prey
what makes those yapping little furballs so special to deny them the privilege of being in my stomach

>> No.9376384

>>9376299
>what's with the moralfaggotry of eating dogs?
People are hypocrites, news at 11.

But generally speaking people don't eat carnivores because they taste bad. Those animals tend to have strong scent glands for marking their territory and/or communicating with members of their pack. This tends to taint the meat and makes it taste bad. Carnivores also tend to be impractically expensive to breed for eating because their food requirements are expensive. Herbivores are much cheaper to feed. They're especially cheap to feed in the context of small family farms: The farmer would plant crops. Parts of those crops were eaten by the family. The other parts which humans couldn't eat were used for animal feed. For example, you might grow beets. Humans can eat the beet root, the greens at the top get fed to the cows. You're basically feeding your livestock with a waste product generated from feeding yourself. That kind of system is impractical with carnivorous animals.

>>9376320
I don't see why the reason of domestication matters at all. People kill and eat animals for meat. If it's morally acceptable to kill a cow or a pig then why not a dog or a cat?

>> No.9376390

>>9376384
good points anon,you're definitely right about them being more expensive to breed
their meat is style nice though,if i would describe the taste it's like lebanese lamb

>> No.9376434

>>9376349
People still use dogs to hunt, anon. Dogs can also be trained to assist in search and rescue, or to help blind people. I'm not saying don't eat dogs, but don't eat those dogs.

I'd imagine dog meat wouldn't be good unless you stewed it anyway. Seems like it would be stringy.

>> No.9376469

Most people are fucking dumb.
Don't expect people to be rational.

>> No.9376484

>>9376434
>People still use dogs to hunt, anon
I think everyone knows that.

I think the point anon was making was that people domesticated animals for what they werenaturally good at. We raised pigs, chickens, goats for food. We raised sheep for wool, and we raised dogs for all sorts of things. There was even a breed (now extinct) whose sole purpose was to run in a wheel (like a giant hamster wheel) in order to turn the spit used for roasting meat over a fire.

People realized long ago what animals were good for what. Dogs were expensive to feed and relatively bad tasting so they were used for working tasks (hunting, herding animals, rat control, guard duty, etc.) Pigs, chickens, cows, etc, were cheap to feed so they were used for food.

>>Seems like it would be stringy.
Like any other animal, texture and toughness depend on the age of the animal and its activity level.

>> No.9376537

>>9376484
they do breed certain dogs for the explicit purpose of eating them. They have adapted to better suit that. Efficacy is not as much of a problem as once thought because dogs unlike cats are not pure carnivores in fact feeding dogs a carb dominant diet significantly improves the flavor. Also they're a delicacy so wide distribution is not prioritized anyways

>> No.9376552

i don't have a problem with someone eating a dog

if they kill it quick and easy and sanitary like any butchery

i have a problem with them being boiled alive or whatever the fuck else the chinese insect people are doing

>> No.9376563

>>9376552
This essentially, this is the only real answer.

>> No.9376570

>>9376469
>Don't expect people to be rational.
People are not rational. They are emotional, illogical beings most of the time. Don't expect them to be autistic robots.

>> No.9376592

>>9376320
are you trying to imply that a tool designed for a specific purpose can not be used for anything but what it was originally designed for? i don't understand this argument.

>> No.9376594

>>9376537
>they do breed certain dogs for the explicit purpose of eating them
I have heard that repeated before. Heck, I've even parroted it myself. But the more I get into learning about cooking the more I doubt it. I'm not calling you a liar, but do you have any credible sources that discuss that? I have zero interest in eating dog, but I would like to put to rest whether that's a real thing or just another one of those silly "you won't believe what those chinks are doing!" scare bullshit memes.

I'm of the opinion that most people avoid eating dog because it doesn't taste very good, but there is a lingering (and very small) market in parts of asia. That market is not due to taste, but due to tradition rooted in the beliefs of Chinese Traditional Medicine that eating dog has some kind of mystical health benefit.

>> No.9376610

>>9376594
Depends how willing are you to read chinese and korean?

>> No.9376611

>>9376299
>i've tasted dogs once and it was pretty delicious

This is the smell of a liar.
Dog is fucking disgusting.

>> No.9376615

>>9376299
It's illegal in Japan but they consider it a delicacy.
They get it on the black market.

>> No.9376627

>>9376611
has it ever occurred to you, on a cooking board, that some people have different tastes then you?

>> No.9376633

>>9376592
I'm not the guy you're replying to, but I think the point isn't so much they "Couldn't" be used for something different, but rather there was little point in doing so because there were other animals available which were better suited to become food. You certainly *could* eat a dog during the early days of domestication (or even now), but why would you want to? The feed cost would probably greatly exceed how much meat you got out of it when it came time to slaughter.

The point of the argument is that you look at the resources you have and you utilize them in the most efficient manner to address your needs. Raising animals with cheap feed (cattle, chickens, pigs) for food makes a lot more sense than raising dogs for food. Especially when the dogs have other practical uses (hunting, guarding, herding, etc.) that greatly exceed their value as food.

It's not so true today since dogs are mainly used as pets, but in a classic peasant scenario (i.e. much of human history) a dog was far more valuable alive than it was as food.

>> No.9376642

>>9376627
That's certianly true.

Also, has it ever occured to you, that sometimes people are so stuck in their ideas that they are no longer credible or reliable sources? Plenty of people tell themselves (and others) that something is delicious when in reality they only eat it for unrelated reasons. I.e. that kid who's choking down his first beer trying to look manly in front of his friends. Or the guy that thinks dog is "delicious" but is only eating it in a desperate attempt to get his peepee working again.

I'm sure there are people out there who genuinely do like dog. But I think the number who eat it out of muh tradition or muh mystic medicine are far more in number.

>> No.9376643

>>9376633
>all meats need to be practical and efficient
what issue are you taking with delicacy? Of course it's not practical nor does it need to be no one's arguing for it to be a stable meat.

>> No.9376649

>>9376633

>> but why would you want to?

well for several reasons first perhaps the need for these dogs to do what they were originally intended to do is outdated and no longer needed? and secondly perhaps the dog is tasty and considered a delicacy? the value of meat is not the only factor in what animals we choose to slaughter. taste is paramount the same way we spend a stupid amount of time and energy raising certain animals when we can get the same nutritional value from plants or insects.

that's like saying we can't eat a horse because it's used for plowing and it isn't worth it to raise a horse for meat because it costs too much compared to a cow. but horsemeat is not cow meat, they taste different. and taste is subjective. it may not be worth it to you, to raise a horse for meat, but it may be worth it to others who value the taste of horse.

>> No.9376652

>>9376615
Eating dog is not a thing in the Japanese diet.

What you're describing is demand from foreigners from other parts of Asia. It's kinda like the demand for horsemeat in Florida. It's not the Americans who are running that black market, rather it's immigrants (legal or otherwise) from central and south america.

Dog meat is not a thing in traditional Jap cuisine. But it is in Chinese, Korean, and other parts of Asia.

>> No.9376656

>>9376643
>what issue are you taking with delicacy?
I don't think it exists. At least not in any appreciable amount to be worth talking about.

>>Of course it's not practical nor does it need to be no one's arguing for it to be a stable meat.
The whole point of of this discussion is "stable meat" as you put it.

Of fucking course there will be exceptions. There are exceptions to everything. Why focus on such a tiny minority when discussing general trends?

>> No.9376657

>>9376642

who knows? there is no way to ascertain if your hypothetical scenarios are the norm or not. but the fact of the matter is, taste is subjective and if some people find it delicious then it is. no sense calling someone a liar because they find something tasty why you don't. i mean you'd have to be a real dick to say OMG you find rare/welldone steak good? you fucking liar! nobody could like rare/well done steak

>> No.9376667

>>9376649
Sure, I understand those reasons you mentioned. But the fact is that those things are much less common than raising animals strictly for food. If we're talking about what people eat (generally speaking) then how can you possibly compare someone slaughtering an old working dog with someone deliberately raising hundreds of cows or pigs with the express intent of eating them?

>>econdly perhaps the dog is tasty and considered a delicacy?
I'm sure that some people do feel that way. But again, lets look at the empirical data. Most people, in most countries, do not eat dog. I think that one really good reason behind that is probably because dog doesn't taste very good to most people. That's also supported by the biological factors like scent glands in predatory animals.

Why don't people (generally speaking) eat dog? It doesn't taste good, and it's expensive to raise.

Of course there will be some exceptions but I think that explains the general trend very well.

>> No.9376669

>>9376656
>The whole point of of this discussion is "stable meat" as you put it.
(it was a correction of staple and I think you knew that)
It's not nor was it ever this is a priority you've imposed as to slant the argument to one of practicality than one of morality or taste.

>> No.9376678

>>9376657
>there is no way to ascertain if your hypothetical scenarios are the norm or not
My scenarios are not hypothetical. We can simply look at what cuisines are offered worldwide, and the size of the industries that support them. Millions upon millions of pigs and chickens are farmed worldwide. Very few dogs. So it's not just "my scenario" here. We can see that worldwide most people don't care for eating dog, but they love pigs chickens and cows. It's not my personal opinion, it's a fact.

I'm sure there are people who enjoy the taste of dog. But I also believe that the majority of dog eaters do so for cultural or perceived medical reasons.

>> No.9376686

>>9376325

Picking cotton.

Also isn't there some sort of nutritional concern about eating carnivores?

>> No.9376694

>>9376667
>>I'm sure that some people do feel that way. But again, lets look at the empirical data. Most people, in most countries, do not eat dog. I think that one really good reason behind that is probably because dog doesn't taste very good to most people. That's also supported by the biological factors like scent glands in predatory animals.

popularity is not good or bad. popular is popular. popularity does not dictate taste, popularity dictates availability.

I don't understand your argument still. If some people are willing to invest their own time in raising an inefficient animal for slaughter, why is it any concern to anyone else if it's their time and money being spent? If some people find a certain type of meat to be tasty, why is it concern of anybody else what they find to be tasty?

i'm really not understanding what argument you are making. mine is that different people have different tastes and if they like the taste of dog then who am i say their taste buds are wrong? it's their time and money if they want to eat a 'inefficient' animal.

>> No.9376698

>>9376669
>it was a correction of staple and I think you knew that
I did. I wasn't trying to nitpick your grammar or spelling.

>>you've imposed as to slant the argument to one of practicality than one of morality or taste.

It wasn't my intent to derail or shift the argument. A quick summary of my thoughts:

-morality? moot point. If it's OK to kill a pig or chicken for food then surely it is OK to kill a dog for food. Done with morality. Moving on:

The next logical question is: if it's not immoral to kill dogs for food, then what is/are the reason(s) behind it being an uncommon food?
Expensive to raise. More useful alive than as food. Tastes bad.

Most people don't eat dog because its a very impractical food. Of course you will have some exceptions where people really do like it, or value it for cultural/etc reasons but that doesn't invalidate the general trend.

>> No.9376700

>>9376678

>>Plenty of people tell themselves (and others) that something is delicious when in reality they only eat it for unrelated reasons. I.e. that kid who's choking down his first beer trying to look manly in front of his friends. Or the guy that thinks dog is "delicious" but is only eating it in a desperate attempt to get his peepee working again

these are the hypothetical scenarios im talking about, not what 'cuisines are offered worldwide'.

>> No.9377892

>>9376320
What happened to dogs that were unable to hunt or offer protection? Oh wait, they eat them because why the fuck not.

>> No.9377980

It's the method in which they despatch the dogs which bothers us.

It's a fact of life that we need to destroy living things and consume organic material but why prolong any suffering?

>> No.9378008

>>9376299
I can't think of any moral reason not to eat dog if eating pigs is moraly acceptable.
Dogs simply have more animate faces and we are more sensitive to their communication.

Well there's the thing that there is lots of evidence in dog psychology that dogs and humans meant to work together and have empathy for each other.

>> No.9378059

>>9376320
Appeal to emotion. Being the first of mankind's slaves doesn't change the fact that it is still a slave.

H-G romanticists deserve to be burned alive.

>> No.9378288

>>9376594
Google pictures of the breed. It's barely any different than a regular dog. Just a way for dumb chinks and the dumbasses who believe them to excuse their shit. They eat dog because strays are literally free and common, not because it tastes good and it won't

>> No.9378311

White people spent the last thousands of years specifically breeding dogs into mans best friend, and have successfully done so. If you are not white, you probably won't have an innate connection with them. There are better food sources, it's just that yellow people aren't capable of raising them

>> No.9378349

>>9378288
At least in korea it's some back alley shit. You won't easily find it and if you finally find someone you can pay enough money to take you to a dog restaurant, it will be a hole in the wall with a few old men hoping they'll be able to have an erection after eating it.

>> No.9378356

>>9376320
Literally irrelevant to why we shouldn't eat them. Like actually has nothing to do with anything. We eat animals we never domesticated.

>> No.9378410

I've tried it. It tasted terrible.

I'm not against raising dogs for food. I'm against degenerate mongoloids who boil dogs alive and torture them to death before eating them.

>> No.9378465

>>9376299
You shouldn't eat carnivores though

>> No.9378535

>>9376611
Mark Weinz confirmed that dog is fucking delicious on his blog

>> No.9378742

>>9376317
In South Korea, they literally do have dog farms for the purpose of eating them

>> No.9378762

>>9378742
In South Korea those farms are going out of business because they depend on a yearly festival that is falling out of favor.

Among other things; including city-folk thinking traditionally torturing animals before slaughter is pretty fucked. Not being racist or anything, but old ways fall out when they're stupid or sadistic.

>> No.9378813

>>9376349
when you create the animals brain to be focused around people, to the same if not more than people, thats when it enters the same social contract as people

>> No.9378873

>>9376686
Eating things further up the food chain is less energy efficient

>> No.9378882

It's the way the animals are killed that makes me angry. They literally boil them alive, or skin them alive, or other disgusting atrocities against them. At least with beef and pork I demand that they be given better treatment before I can feel better about eating them. I can't stomach nasty factory raised animals who have to suffer.

>> No.9378891

>>9376320
>The dog was specifically domesticated to help humans hunt and provide protection.
You really think fucking cavemen had the foresight and organizational ability to purposefully domesticate dogs for ROI?

>> No.9378916

>>9376299

My problem with it is the way the animals are treated before slaughter, Id have an issue wiith any animal treated like that.

>> No.9379020

>>9376299
Yeah we kill huge amounts of dogs every day but don't eat any of them

>> No.9379038

>>9376299

I would eat a human if it wouldn't get me arrested. Anything that isn't yourself is fair game when it comes to eating.

>> No.9379053

I don't eat fellow Predators. Dogs eat meat, cats eat meat. Predators are higher on the food chain and deserve our respect.

I also think hicks eating Alligator is nasty.

>> No.9379069

I'm not a moralfag yet I have no desire to eat dog meat.

Maybe it's the way asians prepare it (blowtorching off the fur and then letting it sit in an open street) but I can't imagine it's very tasty. I get the feeling it's a musty meat.

>> No.9379072

>>9379053
uh pigs and chickens eat meat too, they are omnivores. dogs are omnivores.

>> No.9379288

>>9379072
They eat worms and bugs. Totally different there.

>> No.9379346

>>9378873
underrated
higher trophic levels require more total feed/water including the animals they need to consume to grow, and also tend to bioaccumulate toxins and heavy metals-

which is why you NEVER eat people.

>> No.9379348

>>9379020
>Put down dog
>Eat dog
>Dog is part of me forever

>> No.9379433
File: 237 KB, 800x800, 1503686580719.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9379433

>>9376686
>Picking cotton.
jesus christ

>> No.9379436
File: 63 KB, 640x898, 1485221493758.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9379436

>>9376325
sopa de macaco

>> No.9379457

>>9379436
UMA

>> No.9379461
File: 47 KB, 501x525, le spook man.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9379461

spook thread

>> No.9379976
File: 72 KB, 701x960, 1504282387392.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9379976

QUEDO DELICIOSO

>> No.9380234

>>9379288
chickens, dogs and pigs are opportunistic eaters, any meat they come across, mice, rats, lizards small animals they will eat if they are hungry and have the opportunity. they aren't restricted by some dietary or moral code.

>> No.9380247

you won't get any moralfagging from me, OP.

i'd eat people. especially if they were my enemies. hell, i'd eat them alive if i hated them. if i was a giant and i wanted to ruin the last moments of someone's life, swallowing them or chewing them up is one of the worst ways to die. i don't even like vore.

>> No.9380256

>>9379288
>They eat worms and bugs. Totally different there.

Lolno. They both love to eat meat. Ever seen a chicken find a mouse? It's like crack to an addict. Videos up on youtube.

Pigs will eat literally anything. They love small animals like frogs, rodents, etc. They will eat carrion as well. That's why they're so valued as farm animals, especially back in the days of small family (peasant) farming. You grew crops, ate what little meat you could afford to, and the pigs converted all your scraps into meat. Vegetable trimmings/peelings, meat scraps, bones, etc all went to the pigs.

>> No.9380330

>>9376320
im pretty sure we domesticated geese before dogs, yo

>> No.9380373

>>9379457
DELICIA

>> No.9380611
File: 512 KB, 2013x2236, 1499149215882.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9380611

>>9376320
Thank God there are still sensible people on this Earth.

>> No.9381738

>>9376299
Just the animal rights crowd shrieking autistically.

You can't eat a dog, not your dog, not any dog, but you're required to sexually mutilate your dog, but if you have sex with your dog you'll be imprisoned and the dog will be killed. Because Jesus and PeTA and HSUS said so.

>> No.9381786

>>9379976
can't these fucking people butcher their meat before cooking it

>> No.9381868

>>9376320
Small grass eating dinosaurs was the first animals humans domesticated you thick plep.

>> No.9381878

>>9376299
t. Korean

>> No.9381880

>>9376320
>dogs
>first animals we domesticated

No.

>> No.9381927

>>9376349
expire you fucking retard

>> No.9381939

>>9378762
>Not being racist or anything

go back to r e d d i t

>> No.9382328

>>9376552
Pretty much this. I don't mind them eating the dogs/cats, but I do mind them being piled into 3×3 cages and inhumanely killed. They also steal peoples pets to sell and eat. They want the moralfags to fuck off and let them eat their meat without realizing that their way of acquiring and killing the animals is why everyone is so against it.

>> No.9382333

>>9376299
I have seen a dog eat a man before. In fact, I've seen many dogs eat many men. I dont see what the problem is.

>> No.9382372

>>9376299
What other predator do we eat? The reason is biological, not some moralfagging.

>>
Delete posts
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action